Who do newcomers give up on Linux?

[srschifano]

While I agree with the point about the documentation, even if we had the best documentation of any software project in the whole world, it would do a new user no good if they didn't read it. As many of you are aware, a lot of new users seem to think its faster to post a question on a forum and get a direct response, rather than actually reading the FAQ or looking up the info themselves.

I am always baffled by people that get angry about being told to read the manual. It comes down, I think, to a combination of laziness and ignorance. Ignorance because many new Windows users don't understand the extent of changing one's operating system (as a result of a general lack of computer knowledge on the public's part). And laziness because looking something up requires someone to think and come up with a process (what do I need to know? where should I start looking? Is there a manual, etc).

Indeed there are a lot of people that don't know where to start.

I agree with the point that the best way of handling new users would be for each user to have an expert set everything up for them, and instruct them on how to do basic computing tasks. Problem with this is its unrealistic (at present) to implement. The idea of sshing into a machine is all well and dandy until one considers what to do if a user's NIC doesn't work.

When I first set my GF up two years ago with Ubuntu, after I was getting everything all set up and ready, she didn't notice any difference between using Windows or Linux, aside for the different programs and look. I am personally of the opinion that if there were more pre-installed Linux boxes out there, many more people would use it, if only b/c they would be locked into using it(much as they are currently locked in to using Windows). You can make the install process as painless and simple as possible, but that still doesn't change the fact that new users have to install a new operating system to get started. That is a big process to be thrusting on people who often don't even know what a hard drive is.

Improved documentation would go a long way into helping new users. But what would also go a long way is better preparing and informing users that there is a learning curve, providing a brief summary of what processes are involved to get set up, and making absolutely sure that a new user understands what is going on before they dive in. This could be accomplished with either a newbie-centric website (or "portal" if you will), or with a dedicated portion of this website that focuses on absolute beginners, not just to Linux, but to computers in general. Perhaps at the end of this pre-instruction, an emphasis on reading the actual manual could be made; I don't think it would be incorrect to suggest a user would be more willing to read the manual if they were better prepared.

This is, of course, if computer-illiterate, websurfing-music-downloading users are to be the main focus. Catering to a more educated level of user is a perfectly acceptable option as well. And to the extent of Novell's target customers (business/enterprise users), openSUSE and SLED/S already accomplish this to an acceptable degree (though it is still not perfect by any measure).

[wakou]

Ex windows computer users need to be encouraged, not told to rtfm or to just get used to Linux, even in a nice way. In the first place there usually is NO manual and in the second, they need answers, not chiding.

2. Which Desktop Manager ? In OpenSuse 11.0 especially, there was very little warning that KDE4 wasn't ready for prime time. Anyone who tried to use KDE4 then found all kinds of things that simply were not working. And it doesn't help when KDE4 fanboys dismiss complaints that things weren't working by telling you it was still a work "in Progress" as if that helped people get their computers working. Open Suse should have left the default KDE manager at 3.5 and described KDE4 as "experimental". There would have been far fewer problems as people would have had a more realistic expectation about KDE4.

3. We should tell people not to mix KDE 3.5 and KDE 4 on the same install. Trying this caused me no end of problems with trying to get my video programs to work.

++++ to all of the above..
I have been using open Suse for nearly a year now, and it still drives me mental.
For example, yesterday I found a little app. that I thought would be handy. (It was to create a wee desktop "ticker" for cricket scores) I downloaded it and was presented with a tar.gz. Off to google find out out how to extract. But: Where to?... I created a directory for it in /home... I get complaints "you do not have permission" WTF, this MY computer...
Learn again how to set permissions. Extract to the new dir. Then what???... off to google again. Some sources say I must do ./configure from a console in the new directory (intuitive eh??? ---- errr NOT) I do this and the computer says "unknown command" or similar. and does nothing (or does it? I have no way of knowing, could not CLI have BY DEFAULT a report after every action/command saying, for instance "DONE"? Experienced users could switch this off.)

Then what?
Off to google again. Now I must "do" make install. Is this "make" or "makeinstall" or "make" then "install" or "make install" or "Make" or...........
So I do this. Screensful of seemingly random verbiage "error" this "fatal" that etc etc etc.
Off now to IRC #suse where a kindly expert takes a look, He suggests I need a compiler. Off to YAST and half a gig of useless (to me) stuff is downloaded, to where I have no idea. I try again. More verbiage.
Off now to #python, where another kindly expert takes my hand and tries to guide me through. After an hour or so of his expertise and my tearing out what little remains of my hair, we come to the conclusion, which is???

"You would be better off writing an app yourself." Well easy for you to say...
It turned out that the app I had downloaded had been written to run in Python 2.3 and would not/could not run in Python 2.6.
He suggested this

[Mon Jun 8 2009] [17:37:31] <Wakou222> <MrElendig> Wakou222: but just for fun, try s/python2\.3/python2\.6/g
Err ... sorry mate, but what is this is it a python command?
[Mon Jun 8 2009] [17:37:43] <MrElendig> Wakou222: sed
[Mon Jun 8 2009] [17:38:02] <MrElendig> it just replaces every ocurance of python2.3 with 2.6
[Mon Jun 8 2009] [17:38:29] <MrElendig> sed -i 's/python2\.3/python2\.6/g' Makefile
[Mon Jun 8 2009] [17:38:49] <_habnabit> MrElendig, it replaces occurances of python2.3 with python2\.6..
[Mon Jun 8 2009] [17:39:02] <Wakou222> MrElendig .. guessed right there, wp me!.... ok I will have a bash (!)

I did and needless to say it still did not work. An entire afternoon of my time wasted, not to mention that of the two experts who had tried to help me. With The Antichrist OS (tm) I would have double clicked the shareware app, tried it and if it did not work or I did not like, uninstalled, job done.
Later I was trying to get skype IM. I installed a plugin for pidgin which told me I needed a newer version. I clicked the link and was presented with another tar.gz. AH HA I says, I know how to do this now...
I download, create a dir, extract, open console, do the mysterious ./gofigure.
screenloads of meaningless stuff, errors fatal can't won't blah blah blah. I now have two non-working apps cluttering up my hard drive, and half a Gig of rubbish besides. I have no idea how to tidy up after them. I have also lost half a day of my life which is, I guess, "unrecoverable"
I still have to boot to "Antichrist (tm) in a virtual machine for 50% of what I need to do on my computer, which sequesters, apppropriately enough 50% of my RAM. If I find something I wish to save or post elsewhere I have to EMAIL it to myself.
I know that you are all good, clever people, I have met Chrys on IRC and she is wonderfully kind, patient and expert. The fact remains however that linux is made by hippies in a shed, for other hippies in other sheds. If the open source community turned its attention to motor manufacture, the result would probably look like this:



After all if my child had odd-shaped ears and was boss-eyed and knock-kneed, he would still be beautiful to me and I would overlook his faults. The wider world however might think differently.

[oldcpu]

Originally Posted by wakou

For example, yesterday I found a little app. that I thought would be handy. (It was to create a wee desktop "ticker" for cricket scores) I downloaded it and was presented with a tar.gz.

I have a pet peeve here.

A problem that we have in Linux is the linux distributions simply do not agree on the directory structure details sufficiently for applications (that are not kernel dependant) to easily run intra-distribution (ie on all distributions). Hence the Linux community wastes a lot of time with packagers unique to each distribution packaging applications specific for their distribution. Thus there is a tremendous duplication and waste of effort.

The result being there are many tar.gz packaged apps, which are NOT really ready for the average user to install. And the packagers are too busy to package it. However the average user reads of the app (which is NOT ready for the average user to install), and the average user gets all enthused about this application, and decides to stride out on their own and install it.

Of course, tar.gz (tarballs) are not really good for the average user, ... the average user fumbles in their attempts to compile/build, and they get upset and storm off linux in a huff ....

So what do we do? Put MASSIVE WARNINGS ??? DO NOT TRY THIS AT HOME ?? on tarballs ?

Efforts to create standards in Linux to ease the cross Linux distribution boundaries seem to be failing, ... so we can not get synergy out of the large number of packagers that we already have to pick up the packaging of more applications common to all distributions.

And the developers do NOT have the time to package for every distribution.

I'm at a loss, and it is a pet peeve.

All I can do is in my posts is to tell new and average users to NOT try to compile unless they have patience and are fatalistic in not being upset if things do not work.

[suse_tpx60s]

Originally Posted by oldcpu

I have a pet peeve here.

A problem that we have in Linux is the linux distributions simply do not agree on the directory structure details sufficiently for applications (that are not kernel dependant) to easily run intra-distribution (ie on all distributions). Hence the Linux community wastes a lot of time with packagers unique to each distribution packaging applications specific for their distribution. Thus there is a tremendous duplication and waste of effort.

I agree 100% with this. Why do they not (or can they not) agree on a standard directory structure? Surely it's in the interest of Linux as a whole and will make it a lot easier on new users and generally all users including developers. The more distro that keep emerging doing their own thing is just fragmenting Linux.

I'm not saying all distros should be the same but at least standardise the directory structures and base config files so apps can be installed across distros without jumping through hoops. It's a total waste of resources having to write separate packages for each distro. It's bad enough that they vary across different versions of the same distro.

[wakou]

and another thing while I am in RANT mode. I like to listen to BBC radio on my PC. Windows, easy.
Linux.... realplayer (yuk), download, install: Nothing. Helix, download install fugg about for a couple of days tear hair break mouse break monitor > return to Windows, HDD cluttered with another couple of non-working apps, who knows where, or how to un-install them or tidy up their mess or get them to work.

[oldcpu]

Originally Posted by wakou

and another thing while I am in RANT mode. I like to listen to BBC radio on my PC. Windows, easy.
Linux.... realplayer (yuk), download, install: Nothing. Helix, download install fugg about for a couple of days tear hair break mouse break monitor > return to Windows, HDD cluttered with another couple of non-working apps, who knows where, or how to un-install them or tidy up their mess or get them to work.

I recommend you start a new thread with "BBC radio streaming problem" in the Title and ask for help. I suspect this can be solved with the appropriate Firefox plugin (possibly mplayerplug-in or some other plugin). In the post text, please also post a link to the stream that is giving you difficult.

[wakou]

I recommend you start a new thread with "BBC radio streaming problem" in the Title and ask for help. I suspect this can be solved with the appropriate Firefox plugin (possibly mplayerplug-in or some other plugin). In the post text, please also post a link to the stream that is giving you difficult.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

Ty OldCPU, I only put it here because I was in rant mode. The simple fact is, rather than attempt to hammer my computer into shape and make it do what I want it to, it is easier to boot in to Windows.

[oldcpu]

Originally Posted by wakou

Ty OldCPU, I only put it here because I was in rant mode. The simple fact is, rather than attempt to hammer my computer into shape and make it do what I want it to, it is easier to boot in to Windows.

Understand.

I have WinXP running in a virtual box and on occasion I have encountered sites that refuse to stream to Linux and so in such cases if I am really curious (to see their stream) I will launch the virtual box winXP and check out the streaming site. I confess I have yet to find a site that I want to keep streaming, if it does not work under Linux without any MS-Windows. Its partly a matter of stubborn philosophy on my part.

BBC constantly change their web interface. However I do believe it will stream to Linux (at least it did a few months ago when I last checked). I'm not on a Linux PC so I can not check now.

[69_rs_ss]

On 6/10/09 9:26 AM, gminnerup wrote:
> In my experience, people with a Mac background are the most
> computer-illiterate users around. Compared to them, Windows users are
> models of technological sophistication.
> To put it charitably: that's because the Mac OS is good at shielding
> users from the technicalities. Too bad that 90% of the rest of the world
> are not on OSX and cannot read their attachments...
> To put it less charitably: Windows users are forced to understand at
> least something about how their computer works because of the many
> problems with MS OS and drivers/applications etc.
> Mac adoption used to be driven by graphic designers, but these days the
> Windows versions of design software are superior. Now the Mac is a
> consumer item, and most Mac users buy a computer as an accessory to
> their Ipod, because it's white, or because it is expensive.
>
>
I don't find that at all. As for attachments, Office 2008 and openoffice
are both on the Mac so I don't know what you are talking about there.
Lastly, I disagree with he windows design software d=being superior. All
the graphic design shops I know of still run Mac's.

[Xtigyro]

Originally Posted by oldcpu

Understand.

I have WinXP running in a virtual box and on occasion I have encountered sites that refuse to stream to Linux and so in such cases if I am really curious (to see their stream) I will launch the virtual box winXP and check out the streaming site. I confess I have yet to find a site that I want to keep streaming, if it does not work under Linux without any MS-Windows. Its partly a matter of stubborn philosophy on my part.

And this is a faster and quick enough way of doing things, right?!?

Pls, leave the idea of "using Windows as a baseline"... If you want newcomers (90% of them are absolutely clueless in computer terms and the OS way of working), you MUST have a bugfree, fully configured OS, in which the things people are used to do, work out-of-the-box or work after following a simple and straighforward guide (which does NOT require more than copying some files, clicking some icons or links on the Internet and so on).

I use Skype. Skype in Linux simply is not good enough (video calls use a lot of CPU time and it often happens to terminate untimely). The look and feel is simply funny, it reminds me of the old chat clients in the early days of "chatting". Nevertheless, i can live with that (THE QUESTION IS WHY i SHOULD LIVE WITH THAT IF IT IS NOT BETTER, FASTER OR AT LEAST EASIER?). But leave Skype. It's a matter of Skype Limited Co. and their business politics.

Video performance... what about video performance and Ati drivers for Linux. A very buggy piece of program code. There is a lot of flickering, 3D performance is poor and is very unstable. I use the open-source radeon or radeonhd (if it happens to be better than radeon) driver (only because it does not make my system unstable).

I'm used to watch a lot of video clips and guides. Try this (it's the HP original clip about disassembling nx9420 laptop and installing new ram memory module):

http://vsslfpro.zcce.compaq.com/plmc...B-BEAAE32C3088 and then click on "Expansion memory board" or any other of these video guides.

And what I should do... i HAVE to reboot my system under Windows to watch it.

It's all about the speed and quality of user's work. If I can do it faster or of higher quality under Linux, I will do it under Linux and I will use only Linux. And it will make me extremely happy because I love Linux idea!

If you can give me a DVD with an OS on it which does not need more time having it configured than using it
and it is only a bit faster than the others, I will thank you thousand times!